JUDGMENT:

1. The question of law, the adjudication of which ultimately shall be decisive of the issues arising in these appeals filed under Section 35-L of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (in brief the Act), is whether various goods mentioned in the Schedule of Excise Tariff are dutiable as such or they would be, excisable goods as defined in the Act, only when they are marketable or capable of being marketed.

2. Law on this issue appears to be fairly settled. Recently a Three Judge bench of this Court speaking through one of us (Honble K.S. Paripoornan, J.) in Indian Cable Co. Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, 1994 (74) ELT 22 while reversing the order of the Tribunal that "the conversion of PVC resin into PVC compound by the processes employed by the assessee, amounts to "manufacture" within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act", therefore, it "was to be charged with excise duty" held, "the provisions of the Act mandate that a finding that the goods are marketable is a pre-requisite or "sine qua non" for the levy of duty".

3. But prior to adverting to it and notice in brief how the law on this aspect has developed, it is but appropriate to mention that the preci